Pankaj vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8028 of 2025

Pankaj

.....Appellant(s)

Versus State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Counsel for Appellant(s) : Manoj Kumar Tripathi, Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Court No. - 87

¶5

HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for appellant and Sri K.K. Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

Learned AGA states that notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal. Copy of the notice provided by the learned AGA be kept on record.

¶8

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with a prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 27.08.2025 passed by the Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, (P.A.Act), Bijnor and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No. 98 of 2025, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 118(1), 3(5), 351(2), 352 B.N.S. and Section-3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(5) of S.C/S.T Act, Police Station- Mandawali, District Bijnor.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed any offence. It was contended that similarly placed co-accused person, namely Rishi @ Rishab has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 11.11.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.7996 of 2025. Therefore, the appellant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. It was submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference

¶10

CRLA No. 8028 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

by this Court.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the submission raised by learned counsel for the appellant.

¶14

I have considered the rival submissions so made and perused the bail order of the co-accused and find that the role assigned to the present appellant is almost similar to that of co-accused person, who has already been granted bail by this Court.

¶15

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, and role assigned to the present appellant, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.

¶16

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶17

Let the appellant - Pankaj involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶18

(i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶20

(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶22

(v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police

¶23

CRLA No. 8028 of 2025

¶24

3

¶25

officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶26

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted.

¶27

(Anil Kumar-X,J.)

¶28

December 1, 2025

¶29

Mini

¶30

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pankaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Raj @ Kallan vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Seema Chaudhary and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Aditya Singh Alias Golu vs State of U.P. and Another

Basant @ Basanth vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagarnath vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others